Last week was a big one in the fight against stop and frisk: Manhattan Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled that stop and frisk has led to unconstitutional stops, ordering tougher oversight of police and even mandating the use of cameras during stops. The decision--a huge one, to be sure--overshadowed another important ruling casting a harsh light on the Mayor's pet policy: Brooklyn Federal Judge John Gleeson finding that the April 4 stop and frisk of Ronald Mayo Jr. to be unconstitutional after police falsely claimed Mayo was stopped because of a visible handgun.

On Sunday's Meet the Press, we got to hear about stop-and-frisk from all angles, starting with Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, who made it clear his feelings are extremely bruised by U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin appointing an independent monitor to make sure the NYPD doesn't trample anyone's civil rights. "This case cries out for appeal," he told host David Gregory. "The judge has indicted the entire New York City Police Department, 35,000 officers of racial profiling, on the flimsiest of evidence." Or they've indicted the leadership of that department on mountains of evidence. Whichever version of reality you prefer, we suppose.

In a historic ruling, a federal judge has ordered that the NYPD's stop-and-frisk practices will be overseen by an independent monitor--the first such move against the city's police department ever. Mayor Bloomberg vowed to appeal the ruling.

Some cracks in the edifice of the stop-and-frisk fortress are starting to show. After three years of litigation, the New York Civil Liberties Union has gotten the NYPD to suspend its database of stopped-and-frisked New Yorkers. Until now, the NYPD has been able to indefinitely store biographical information on everyone it detained, even if their cases were dismissed or resolved with a civil fine.

The Daily Caller, rightwing blog and trusty purveyor of all things clickbait-y, aggressively aggregated a story over the weekend that a woman has sued the city over being stopped and frisked in Brooklyn last year. The piece about the woman, who writer Eric Owens emphasizes over and over as being "white" and "vegan", details a stop-and-frisk she endured while running errands. Playing on lazy tropes about vulnerable white women? Race-baiting to thrill even the most hard-bitten of racists? A lame dad's reductive understanding of class and culture in New York? Check, check, and check.

It comes as no surprise that controversy would ride the coattails of the news yesterday that Attorney General Eric Holder may suggest a federal monitor over the NYPD should stop-and-frisk be deemed unconstitutional in Floyd v. New York. Bloomberg and NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly freaked out in a teleconference with Holder the other day when they heard about the Justice Department's proposal. And yesterday, at an unrelated press conference, the m ayor made his opposition to the proposal absolutely, 100 percent clear.

Maybe the parts of the Community Safety Act that debuted on the council floor yesterday won't even be necessary. In an exclusive report by the Daily News last night, it's been discovered that Attorney General Eric Holder and his Justice Department are thinking about asking the trial judge on Floyd v. New York--the case in motion downtown that questions the constitutionality of stop-and-frisk--to assign an inspector general to oversee the NYPD's actions should the practice be overturned. A controversy so bad, even Washington might get involved.

Two studies have slammed assumptions about stop-and-frisk's effectiveness this week. On Wednesday, an NYCLU report showed that black New Yorkers have been disproportionally stopped for suspected possession of marijuana, with cops wrong about that suspicion 91.5 percent of the time. Another report put out by the public advocate this week shows that white New Yorkers, when stopped, are actually far more likely to possess a weapon than African-Americans.

In an act of desperation, the city of New York has used the media to launch a "despicable" attack on the federal judge presiding over a landmark stop-and-frisk trial, attorneys for the plaintiffs say.

Early Wednesday morning, the New York Daily News published a story describing an internal report compiled by Mayor Michael Bloomberg's staff that purports to show that judge Shira Scheindlin is "biased against law enforcement."

By lunchtime, the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents the plaintiffs, had fired off a response, calling the report an "inappropriate stunt."

Following court yesterday afternoon, Darius Charney, one of CCR's lead attorneys on the case, said the allegations achieved a level of absurdity he has never encountered before.

"I've heard some ridiculous, outrageous accusations thrown out by the city over the years," Charney said. "But this is the most ridiculous one I've ever heard, and I actually find it despicable."

The report's emergence coincides with the final week of testimony in the trial. From 2004 to 2012 the department reported 4.4 million stops; nearly nine out of 10 the subjects, the vast majority of whom were black or Latino, were released without an arrest or summons. Plaintiffs in the case say the stops have amounted to widespread constitutional rights violations, including unlawful search and seizure and racial profiling.

At this point, it goes without saying the controversy that is stop and frisk will be a staple of the 2013 mayoral race.

Floyd v. New York - a case that seeks to upend the controversial practice - is heating up, as the NYPD seeks to justify its usage through intimidating tutorial videos. The Community Safety Act, which would implement serious transparency measures on the boys in blue, is currently making its way through City Council, with each major figure in New York City politics taking a stand on it. And, of course, we learned last week that stop and frisk numbers are actually dropping as we move closer to the ballots.

The momentum is evident here but, for voters, their options are limited. As of now, Comptroller John C. Liu is the only candidate that has called for the complete repeal of stop and frisk across the five boroughs. Christine Quinn and Bill de Blasio has called for its reform, holding themselves back from full elimination of a policy that has racked up 5 million tallies since its inauguration.

So, when it pertains to stop and frisk, what better time for civil rights groups to call on the youth vote to get things done?